• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Will Solyndra be Obama's waterloo?

Help Support Ranchers.net:

Faster horses

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2005
Messages
29,486
Reaction score
671
Location
NE WY at the foot of the Big Horn mountains
"Solyndra is only the small focal point of a much larger racketeering project in which the White House and Democrat lawmakers are guilty of running an organized crime ring." -Jason Bradley, BigGovernment.com

There you have it. It can't be ignored. It can't be dismissed. It can't be swept under the rug. And finally somebody came out and said it. Let's be blunt: Bradley is simply putting to words what an ever increasing number of patriotic Americans already believe: The Obama Administration, in its quest to ram its dangerous agenda down the throats of the American people, will stop at nothing. Barack Obama’s willingness to exert autocratic and despotic rule on issue after issue must be fully investigated and exposed.

We've said it before, and we'll say it again: How far must Barack Obama go before our elected officials in Congress come to the realization that a “Chicago Thugocracy” has seized control of our government? How long will they bury their heads in the sand before they realize that it is not enough to simply say that "Obama's policies are failing"... that the actions of the Obama Regime are "unconstitutional?" When will they realize, as Congressman Steve King (R-IA) recently said about one scandal in particular, that the actions of this regime are indeed "LAWLESS?"

It boggles the mind to know that our elected officials have the power to right this wrong... to hold this runaway thugocracy to account... and yet, they do little to nothing while Barack Obama and his crew shake the American people down. And as patriotic Americans, the actions we must take are clear. We will not accept complacency from our so-called leaders in Congress. We will not be ignored. We will not be put off and we will not let them get away with doing nothing.

We must make our voices heard and make our leaders in Congress understand that the American people are not going to go away; we will not sit down and shut up. Our elected officials must come to know that we will keep making our demands known and won’t stop until the mounting scandals in the Obama White House are fully investigated, exposed and prosecuted.

from : The Center for Individual Freedom
 

Lonecowboy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2006
Messages
1,990
Reaction score
0
Location
eastern Montana
my understanding FH is that the Senate handles impeachment hearings,
with the current makeup of our senate that isn't going to happen. maybe that's why the democrat gal was calling for a suspension of elections? :???: :???: that would be the only way for dems to stay in power. I think we have to wait for the ballot box!

But then obama needs to be prosecuted to the FULL extent of the law for all of his crimes against US.
 

Steve

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
16,547
Reaction score
1
Location
Wildwood New Jersey
While I would agree that with the current makeup of the senate the possibility of impeachment would be impossible.

the congress starts the process and a trial must be held, and voted on..

http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/thepresidentandcabinet/a/impeachment.htm

I do not believe his getting off would be worth the congress's gamble in getting the process started. ..

after a little research it seems the Special council is the best way to hold the executive branch responsible.

Originally created by the Independent Counsel Act (1978)

Expired at midnight on June 30, 1999

The Office of Special Counsel in the United States Department of Justice replaced the former Office of the Independent Counsel in 1999. It is charged with investigating alleged misconduct in the federal government's executive branch. The current Special Counsel is Patrick Fitzgerald,
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
While Railing Against Solyndra, Republican House Members Host $11.8 Billion in Loan Guarantees in their Districts

By Stephen Lacey on Sep 20, 2011 at 3:54 pm

“Can’t escape from the common rule: If you hate something, don’t you do it too.” — Pearl Jam

Playing up the Solyndra bankruptcy to the highest political degree possible, Republicans are using their best rhetorical tricks. They have homed in on two phrases to describe loan guarantees — calling them a tool of “crony capitalism” and claiming that they allow the government “to pick winners and losers.”

Practically every conservative politician speaking to the press about Solyndra has used these phrases, often in the exact same sentence.

But a Climate Progress examination of public Department of Energy data finds over $11.8 billion in conditional commitments or closed loan guarantees for renewable energy and nuclear projects in Republican House districts around the country.

The data does not prove whether individual members of Congress lobbied for support of specific projects. However, recent stories from the Associated Press and the New York Times show that a number of high-profile political leaders have helped secure grants and loan guarantees through the stimulus package for projects in their districts. AP highlighted a few of the contradictions in a story yesterday:

Louisiana Sen. David Vitter and other Republicans have criticized the Obama administration for awarding billions of dollars in taxpayer subsidies for renewable energy projects, including a $528 million loan to a now-bankrupt California solar panel maker. But the GOP lawmakers haven’t always been so critical of the program.

Documents obtained by The Associated Press show the Louisiana Republican wrote to the Energy Department at least seven times since 2009 seeking money for projects that would benefit his home state.

One of the projects backed by Vitter — for a company that makes activated carbon to reduce pollution at coal-fired power plants — has received preliminary approval for a $245 million loan guarantee.

Numerous GOP senators, including Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, have sent letters to the Energy Department seeking assistance for projects in their home states.

On the Senate floor last week, McConnell called the first stimulus law “a national punch line” that featured “turtle tunnels” and “ sidewalks to nowhere.”

But in 2009, McConnell wrote two letters to Energy Secretary Steven Chu asking for federal loans for a plant that would build electric cars in Franklin, Ky. McConnell said the loans said could help create 4,000 jobs.

“I hope you will realize the importance of such job creation to Kentucky,” he wrote in a July 2009 letter supporting ZAP Motor Manufacturing. The plant did not receive DOE money.

And Florida Republican Cliff Stearns, who is also leading an investigation into the Solyndra loan guarantee, backed two separate clean energy projects for his state:

Stearns, who heads the House Energy and Commerce subcommittee on oversight and investigations, endorsed a battery manufacturing plant in Jacksonville. The Saft America Inc. plant makes lithium-ion battery cells for military hybrid vehicles and solar and wind energy storage. The plant received a $95.5 million grant from the Energy Department through the stimulus law.

Stearns and other lawmakers from Florida also backed a Florida company’s bid to win a loan guarantee for biofuel refinery plant in central Florida. New Planet BioEnergy LLC received $50 million from the Energy Department and a $75 million loan guarantee from the Agriculture Department.

McConnell, Stearns and Vitter are defending themselves by explaining that the companies they’ve supported haven’t gone bankrupt or been raided by the FBI. Fair enough. But their lobbying for funds in the cleantech sector completely undermines the argument that Democrats are trying to pick winners and losers — or that the stimulus package didn’t work.

And as we pointed out last week, Michigan Republican Fred Upton, chairman of one of the House committees investigating Solyndra, has been a strong supporter of nuclear loan guarantees — even sponsoring an amendment in 2007 that would have expanded the nuclear loan guarantee program by $4 billion. Yet, Upton claimed in a hearing on Solyndra that the government is “acting as venture capitalist” that is, of course, “picking winners and losers…and shelling out billions in taxpayer dollars to keep them afloat.”

As one of the strongest nuclear supporters in Congress, Upton surely understand that nuclear facilities would not get built in this country without billions of dollars in loan guarantees and government-backed insurance. Private industry wouldn’t even consider building a nuclear facility in America without full government support (see also Exelon’s Rowe: Low gas prices and no carbon price push back nuclear renaissance a “decade, maybe two”).

And California Republican Darrell Issa, chairman of the House Oversight Committee, dropped a typical rhetorical bomb on CSPAN this morning: “I want to see when the president and his cronies are picking winners and losers.”

But Issa has no problem boosting government support for nuclear through loan guarantees — a policy that supposedly picks winners and losers.

[A]dapting our tax structure to incentivize investments in nuclear technologies and using the guarantee of the federal government to jump-start a robust nuclear energy program, we can reclaim our place in the world and reduce our dependence on carbon-rich fossil fuels.

Forget crony capitalism. What we have here is phony capitalism.

A number of leading Republicans have repeatedly sought grants, tax credits and loan guarantees to support projects in their own districts. But when it’s politically advantageous, they now make the claim that government is “picking winners and losers” and violating the free market.

We all want to see taxpayer funds deployed as efficiently and fairly as possible. Solar energy is soaring in this country and around the world, which suggests governmental support for the industry is working in a lot of countries. The nuclear industry has all but died in non-market economies, in spite of massive government support (see “Nuclear Pork — Enough is Enough“). Which one is the winner and which is the loser?

— Matt Kasper of the Center for American Progress contributed to this report.
Tags:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Look at what Solyndra was trying to develop. As we go along there will be a breakthrough in renewable energy it will only take time.
http://insideclimatenews.org/news/20110920/solyndra-bankruptcy-groundbreaking-solar-panel-technology-loan-guarantee-obama-cylindrical-modules
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Messages
24,216
Reaction score
0
Location
real world
Hurley, it was well known before Solnydra got the funds that they did not have a solid business plan. Many people knew they were about to go bankrupt.

There were some obama contributors involved.

The stimulus was a political payoff, as some of have said from the beginning. Only 6% of the $800+ billion went to infrastructure and was predicted at the time, that obama would be coming back to the "well" again for more much needed infrastructure spending.

It is the Democrats that quite often criticize the Republicans for "crony capitalism", but now that obama is involved in some of his own, they re-iterate that it is the Republican districts that got funding....... :roll:

Did the funding come before or after the Democrats voted ffor the stimulus bill?
 

Steve

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
16,547
Reaction score
1
Location
Wildwood New Jersey
hurleyjd said:
Look at what Solyndra was trying to develop. As we go along there will be a breakthrough in renewable energy it will only take time.
http://insideclimatenews.org/news/20110920/solyndra-bankruptcy-groundbreaking-solar-panel-technology-loan-guarantee-obama-cylindrical-modules

I wouldn't argue that they didn't have a good Idea.. Evergreen had a great idea.. but when the government money ran out they did as well...

Ideas often break even the best inventors.. not because the idea is bad, some of the most famous inventors died poor.. all for a lack of ability to market their idea..

as more comes out about solnydra it appears it was more of a business scam then a great idea..

When it closed, it was still improving its thin-film technology, which couldn't yet convert as much sunlight to electricity as its crystalline silicon competitors.

in other words it didn't work..
 

Latest posts

Top